Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Denial About Workflow Among Camera Companies

dslrbodies.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 56 posts

Re: Denial About Workflow Among Camera Companies

#31

Post by sigstoat »

photigragraphy wrote: post #23

While I understand the author's perspective of the ease of smartphones for photography he is really only viewing a subset of photographers. In this instance his audience would be photojournalists who need to minimize the time from capture to presentation. Once could also see those casual users who want to share their images on social media quickly too. The author's view excludes fine art photography as well as a numb…

better networking features would be great for studio photographers. if their camera is always within 20 feet of their computer, why should they even need to buy SD cards? they should be able to shoot straight into lightroom, wirelessly. even if you don't need speed, you'll still always take all the convenience you can get.

i'll admit i have not explored every feature of my 70D and lightroom, but i'm pretty sure the combination can't pull that off.

Re: Denial About Workflow Among Camera Companies

#32

Post by danaliv »

stevep98 wrote: post #24
jdmichal wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cameras that integrate well with phones already exist. I have a Sony camera that can: * Wirelessly transfer images to my phone using wifi-direct. * Do so with a tap, as it has an embedded NFC tag. * Be remotely controlled by my phone, including a laggy but usable viewfinder display on my phone screen. This mode also automatically transfers pictures taken to the phone. Partially reposted from: https://news.ycombinator…

I find the wifi connectivity between Sony camera and my iPhone quite painful, mostly down to the fact that it creates its own wifi access point that my iPhone must switch to. Why can't it just connect to my home access point (so it can reach my iMac, and the cloud)

My Fuji works this way too. It's maddening. And the only reason I need to transfer anything to my phone in the first place is to make up for deficiencies in the camera.

Re: Denial About Workflow Among Camera Companies

#33

Post by 21 »

baq wrote: post #19
wmf wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the author is imagining going from shutter press to a CMS or social media in seconds. Any workflow that involves a computer at all has already lost. If cameras can produce JPEGs presumably they should be able to produce low-res JPEGs.

yeah there's no reason why lightroom couldn't work on the camera itself if it can run on an ipad. it's not like the high end dslrs couldn't be fitted with the necessary compute power - lightroom runs on old ipads after all.

And for that matter you should be able to put a SIM card into the camera for direct network access. It's also big enough to put some nice antennas inside it, so you should have better signal than a phone.

Re: Denial About Workflow Among Camera Companies

#34

Post by 21 »

jandrese wrote: post #11
vvanders wrote: post #3

Not sure what the author is on about, last I checked almost every company offered a wifi adapter for their cameras. Heck, with my 6D I can share directly to my phone and post to social media just like you can with a smart phone camera. The thing is for the stuff I want to do, I spend at least as much time in post and doing that on a smartphone would be a huge pain.

I'm wondering if he is advocating for LTE modems in phones, so he can pull a picture up on the display, see that it looks passable, and hit the "send to my editor" button. Or maybe just phone integration so he can send the photos to his phone where he can stuff them in an email and send them to the editor. His primary complaint seems to be getting scooped by teenagers with their smartphones, but I don't see how anyth…

So you could have a little button on the camera that posts the last/next picture you took/will take on FB.

"Workflow" can mean just an auto-correct/auto-awesome filter on the camera. It will certainly beat the equivalent processing happening on a phone.

Re: Denial About Workflow Among Camera Companies

#35

Post by JohnBooty »

I feel what this guy's saying about camera makers' goofy workflows. I've done that myself -- gone out and shot a bunch of stuff on my DSLR and let it languish on the SD card for months because importing and editing the photos on my laptop was a bit of a pain.

Honestly though, now that I've plopped down the relatively small amount of money?

The SD-to-Lightning adapter for iOS gets me about 90% of the way there. Sure, I have to physically move the SD card from my DSLR to my phone, but whatever. At that point they get imported and as far as anything in iOS is concerned they're indistinguishable from photos I took with the phone itself.

(I'm reasonably certain this is more or less equally easy to do with Android given an OTG cable or internal SD slot but I don't know)

I'm not even sure I want my camera maker trying to be any smarter than that. Ideally, of course, the phone should be able to put photos onto my camera via wifi or BT. But I can freaking well guarantee that functionality will just rot at some point. It will be broken by some future OS update, or some other reason, and it's not a thing I expect I'd be able to count on in 12 months or 5 years.

Re: Denial About Workflow Among Camera Companies

#36

Post by ghaff »

rodgerd wrote: post #8
foolrush wrote: post #2

Would suggest the author is conflating a diversity of workflows for a single, monotheistic view. Professional imagers have large files, and they must post-produce them. Those things like card readers, additional ports, etc. ignore that particular audiences needs. To draw an analogy to another closely relation field in motion pictures, this too is mired in a divergence of needs and contexts. The author of the post wou…

> Making a case for XXX workflow should always be grounded in the contexts present. Here's the context: camera makers are getting the shit kicked out of them. The market is plummeting. It caters to the myopic needs of people who want to pretend that, to be a photographer, you have to work like it's a 1950s darkroom, only with computers. Compact cameras a being destroyed by cellphones, which is where all the imaging i…

There is imaging innovation happening in cellphones but a lot of it is going to making the physical/optical limitations of a device that people are happy to carry with them all the time not prevent taking a "good enough" photograph. I do think that computational photography is going to become more important and that, as we move away from "decisive moment" photo styles in many cases, even higher-end camera will change as a result.

But it's unclear what exactly makes sense in higher-end camera today, especially given that much of the audience for such cameras generally hate interfaces getting all cluttered up with the consumer features of the moment. (e.g. I think my Canon DSLR has some sort of direct to printer that I've never used--and can't imagine many do these days).

Re: Denial About Workflow Among Camera Companies

#37

Post by tomc1985 »

Fine, but if this guy's proposals fuck up my RAW workflow then he and all his ideas can burn in hell. I want quality, not speed, and I could care less whether the image lives on an SD card or in the cloud. Nevermind the fact that a lot of photography happens away from the cloud, out in the wilderness, and if we march forward into this brave new world of thin devices and cloud integration then these photographers will get left in the dust... thereby preserving the older (and superior IMO) workflow.

Creative professionals are not very interested in keeping up with the curve. In art, mastery over media is a lifetime endeavor and it somewhat assumes that the medium will not change very much. Disruptions affect one's ability to produce quality output for a good long time, because they have to relearn the medium. Pretty much the only people who are OK with that on a regular basis are tech nerds (and not artists)

Re: Denial About Workflow Among Camera Companies

#39

Post by jdmichal »

stevep98 wrote: post #24
jdmichal wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cameras that integrate well with phones already exist. I have a Sony camera that can: * Wirelessly transfer images to my phone using wifi-direct. * Do so with a tap, as it has an embedded NFC tag. * Be remotely controlled by my phone, including a laggy but usable viewfinder display on my phone screen. This mode also automatically transfers pictures taken to the phone. Partially reposted from: https://news.ycombinator…

I find the wifi connectivity between Sony camera and my iPhone quite painful, mostly down to the fact that it creates its own wifi access point that my iPhone must switch to. Why can't it just connect to my home access point (so it can reach my iMac, and the cloud)

Requiring an access point doesn't work in the field.

Re: Denial About Workflow Among Camera Companies

#40

Post by lanius »

Somewhat relevant, I used my DSLR to take pictures in a country 8 timezones away.

Later as I was going through my pictures, I unfortunately realized that the EXIF DateTime field is a string, meaning I had to batch-convert the timestamps into the country's local time. It was a completely unnecessary annoyance, why couldn't EXIF just use Unix time?

Post reply on HN